Skip to main content

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Mar 12, 2011 3:14pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 8.9 Earthquake & 13 ft. Tsunami Honshu Japan

"you are an atheist, which I do consider a belief system that incorporates faith"

Then you understand very little. It is not a 'belief system' it is a considered stance that rejects faith in favour of evidence and proof. Proof does not require faith and faith does not require proof. You know which side of the equation I'm on.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Mar 12, 2011 4:09pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 8.9 Earthquake & 13 ft. Tsunami Honshu Japan

Whichever way you would like to spin it, atheism is a belief system. What evidence or proof do you have for such beliefs?
You rely on so called proof to define the limits of one faith over another, with atheism being superior, when we have no evidence that it is. Can you ever give me absolute certainty on anything? It's all a leap of faith. I have seen few atheists admit that.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Mar 12, 2011 4:32pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 8.9 Earthquake & 13 ft. Tsunami Honshu Japan

Do you actually bother to read and digest what's being said to you before you go off on one of your illogical rants? My atheism is, as I clearly stated, borne out of a lack of any compelling evidence that would lead me to accept the existence of a deity in any shape or form. Of course there's no such thing as absolute certainty; science always has been adjusted and revised as new discoveries are made and tested.

I'll throw it back at you - where's there a shred of evidence to support your stance?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Mar 12, 2011 4:52pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 8.9 Earthquake & 13 ft. Tsunami Honshu Japan

Hiding behind disparagement does not answer the central question of atheism as belief system. Let's take the 'negative' of a picture of one of the major faith's. You reject these religions thoughts. But the contours of your own beliefs are in reaction to what you oppose. You present nothing other then opposition.
How can you reject God when nothing can empirically be certain? How can you look at the universe and then our scale in it and believe that you know all, and see all, and then believe when you say there is nothing out there larger than your understanding. That's a lot of faith.

Jesus of Nazareth was the son of a carpenter, who towards the end of his life became a rabbi. His teachings and views were original and placed him on the fringes of Judaic thought. He then came into conflict with various factions, and was then crucified by the Romans. That I think we all can agree on.

I had a long, long post here filled with Biblical quotes, but in the end it's simpler. It comes down to my own leap of faith. I guess it comes down to whether you can simply admit that you take a similar leap?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Mar 13, 2011 6:33am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 8.9 Earthquake & 13 ft. Tsunami Honshu Japan

I guess you missed it below; this is simply untrue. You are the one stretching for imagining that the converse of something is its equivalent, in form or structure.

This is precisely the same reason "we" stopped talking about science; you persistently confuse and confound these issues (in essence, wanting the non-believer to state: "yup, our systems are equal; you believe in a mythical being, and I make a similar leap of faith to not believe" and "oh yeah, science is just like religion, yup...").

It's absolute blather. And your ref to Kant is both misguided and uninformed. Read him again; although he tackles the error you are making, he wasn't this crude about it.

Sorry, but there is no nice way to put this...

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Mar 13, 2011 8:32am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 8.9 Earthquake & 13 ft. Tsunami Honshu Japan

Is this a tag team?
No WT, it is the arrogance at the root of not admitting that atheism is a belief system. That somehow, even though there is no basis for this belief system other than faith, atheism can rise above these petty religious concerns of man.
If one states they are an agnostic I can respect that. They don't know. They don't have enough information. They make no claims.
My line of questioning is not blather, but the future of how atheism will be questioned (I am far from the first). You require empirical proof, but there is none for the belief system of atheism.

Atheist Statement No. 1 - 'Atheism declares it does not believe in faith, that science is the way to truth because it does not rely on faith unlike religion. Science does not rely on faith and therefore cannot be biased.'

Rebuttal: Even in science, we still need a certain degree of faith in scientists and researchers since we ourselves cannot possibly verify all their findings to prove that what they are saying is true.

Unless you can verify scientists' findings one by one for yourself, you will have to accept their 'word' at face value. You will have to believe that what they're saying is true. You will have to have 'faith' in their words.

In the past and today, we've had 'scientific errors' committed by scientists. Errors such as scientific facts that were declared as truth but were later found out to be false or in doubt. Global warming, I'm sorry, global cooling, no wrong again, climate change, is the most recent and glaring example.

That science is not based on faith is totally false. Therefore, this refutes the first statement of atheism.

As St. Francis of Assisi said 'Faith is higher than reason. Reason is useless.... unless you believe.'

Atheist Statement No. 2 - 'Science is based only on purely objective facts, while religion is partially subjective and therefore cannot be purely objective.'

Rebuttal: Science relies on objectivity, and needs to utilize the scientific method. The scientific method relies on observation, experimentation, data-gathering, etc. (See I do know!)

Once science loses its objectivity, or becomes partially subjective, it loses its credibility as a discipline.

Therein lies the problem. The scientific method does provide purely objective data, but scientists still have to 'interpret' them. Since scientists are only human (and therefore flawed), the interpretation of the data becomes mixed with personal opinions and becomes "partially subjective". This cannot be avoided. Even through peer review.

Scientists are human beings with different beliefs, religions, philosophies, and come from various countries and cultures throughout the globe that all inform aspects of their scientific data.

Atheist statement number 2 is therefore false.

Atheist Statement No. 3) 'Science is better than religion because it relies on an objective method - the scientific method. This method produces truth because it is based on objective data, experimentations, logic, etc. Religion does not use an objective method and is based on opinion, speculation, etc. For example, it lacks 'scientific proof' on 'miracles' in the Bible.'

Rebuttal: Science does rely on an objective method, but by what authority does the 'scientific method' produce truth? By what authority does science possess when it says we must believe science because it utilizes the 'scientific method'?

One cannot state that science is an authority of truth simpy because it uses the scientific method. It's like saying 'I therefore conclude that science produces truth because it uses the scientific method.'

By what authority?

How will you prove using the scientific method does produce truth? Because it's 'scientific'? Because 'science' said so? (The burning test tube?) Again, the question, 'By what authority does science have by proclaiming to be the truth?'

The statement, 'The results of the scientific method should be followed" is unscientific because it is a value statement that does not get its authority from anywhere but itself.

Atheist Statement No. 4) 'The scientific method is true because it works and because it is axiomatic.'

Rebuttal: Sounds a lot like faith to me. Who decides what is axiomatic? Does the scientific method decide it? That makes it circular if it does. If not, then it is not scientific itself.

I would have to do all the experiments to come to that conclusion. Other than that, I take it on faith that all of the scientists who did the experiments and reviewed them and tested them are not lying to me.

You cannot use the 'scientific method' as a reason to make science as an authority of truth, simply because the only way to prove science as the truth is to use the 'scientific method', which is flawed. The logic is circular and therefore unable to prove that it is not a system of belief.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Mar 13, 2011 10:48am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 8.9 Earthquake & 13 ft. Tsunami Honshu Japan

You're going to have to do a lot better by way of argument than cutting and pasting from some other fucker's blog and passing it off as your own. (Did I miss the attribution? No, don't think so.)

http://theseekeroftruth.blogspot.com/2005/07/why-atheism-is-wrong.html

He, like you, has not the first clue as to how science works. If you're going to keep up this persistence in calling it a belief system then I challenge you to produce an alternative 'belief system' that could have produced the modern world complete with the computer that allows you to broadcast your specious nonsense.

Everyone ought to believe in something and I believe this conversation is at an end. I'm only going to crack my head against the wall of your foolishness so many times. If you want to walk away thinking you've won, fine, I really couldn't give a damn.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Mar 13, 2011 11:38am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 8.9 Earthquake & 13 ft. Tsunami Honshu Japan

You are correct. I did forget to attribute. Thank-you for gently reminding me.
So when you are challenged it's 'foolishness'? This was a discussion that began when I simply asked you why do you expect perfection (in relation to this thread topic)? Throughout your posts nothing but arrogance, bile, and name calling, which you did not receive in turn. Believe you me, I am done with these discussions with you. Emotions always seem to get the better of you.

Though, in a way it is kinda funny how you pick and choose.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Mar 13, 2011 11:59am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: The End is nigh... thank the (non-existent) lord

Never at any time did I 'ask for perfection'. Again and again I have pointed out to you that this was a total misinterpretation on your part of what I actually did say.

'Forgot to attribute' my hairy arse. You tried, and failed, to pass off someone else's blatherings as your own. This is, I guarantee you, the first time I've felt any emotion in this exchange, and it's not a positive one.


Now fuck off.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Mar 13, 2011 12:16pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: The End is nigh... thank the (non-existent) lord

Is that after dinner and a kiss?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: bluedevil Date: Mar 13, 2011 11:07am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

You say black I say white
You say bark I say bite
You say shark I say hey man
Jaws was never my scene
And I don't like Star Wars
You say Rolls I say Royce
You say God give me a choice
You say Lord I say Christ
I don't believe in Peter Pan
Frankenstein or Superman
All I wanna do is

Bicycle bicycle bicycle
I want to ride my bicycle bicycle bicycle
I want to ride my bicycle
I want to ride my bike
I want to ride my bicycle.....

Took my nine year old to a cover/tribute band last night and they were freakin' great. She did the Wayne's World headbang to Bohemian Rhapsody and shouted the above. I couldn't believe how good it was. Then we got up for church this morning - ACC Tourney Final. She's now shouting "Go to Hell Carolina, Go to Hell!"

OK - does my hijack close this thread? We all wish the best for folks in Japan. My buddy still hasn't heard the fate of his bride-to-be or her daughter

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Mar 13, 2011 11:51am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

I hope your friend hears from his bride-to-be. I hope she and her daughter are O.K.
Now some BB!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Mar 13, 2011 12:08pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

The Wayne's World headbang is infinitely better than banging your head against a wall. You'll be pleased to know I'm done here, bd. Tom's is the only brand of Petty-ness I feel the need for now. Going to go and indulge my Mojo.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: robthewordsmith Date: Mar 13, 2011 8:54am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 8.9 Earthquake & 13 ft. Tsunami Honshu Japan

Looking around me I see no evidence to support the notion that the universe had a divine creator who, in some shape or form, maintains a presence here, and who takes some passing interest, benign or otherwise, in human affairs. This is an empirical position; it is not a belief system.

If, and it’s a big if, you choose to consider science as a belief system, then it is one in which its beliefs and assumptions are constantly being tested and revised. If a hypothesis fails the test of experiment then it’s wrong – we reject it and move on. Faith plays no part in the set up.

If you can present me with repeatable, measurable, incontrovertible evidence for the existence of god then I’ll have to change my mind, but this is the challenge you consistently refuse to take up, falling back on blithe leaps of faith as justification for your stance.

I can look at the universe and know that there are structures beyond human comprehension on scales that are simply mind boggling, but I can have some glimmering of an understanding of how it works. I know absolutely that I’m a very, very insignificant part of the universe, and yet feel no need whatsoever to conjure up a divinity to get me through the day.


Your mini-bio of Jesus seemed utterly pointless and irrelevant.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Mar 13, 2011 10:34am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 8.9 Earthquake & 13 ft. Tsunami Honshu Japan

I am not trying to convince you of God's existence, just that atheism is equally a belief system. My argument is under WT's post.
You are right. The mini bio was lame. I ought to have edited that out.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Mar 13, 2011 2:04pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 8.9 Earthquake & 13 ft. Tsunami Honshu Japan

Sorry, like Rob, I am "done" here just as I was the first go round (go back to those threads and see my consistency if you like).

And, your consistency in grabbing some twit's strawman: no scientist in his/her right mind talks about "truth"...

That is where this critique starts and STOPS; you've got a lame reference (the blog or whatever above) as TRUTH is not an issue in science (it's unknowable, and the domain of your area of interest: faith, morality, etc., etc.). So, the minute I read that in your long post...the red light goes off, it's an indication of a major miscomprehension.

Sorry--well, at this point, just fed-up--but you simply are wrong about how you typify science, atheists, and so on and so forth....

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Mar 13, 2011 6:45pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 8.9 Earthquake & 13 ft. Tsunami Honshu Japan

Hey, Thanks for getting involved WT. It's so unappreciated. What made you feel compelled to get involved when we had both said no mas to each other months ago on this very subject? Thanks for taking an ugly and sad situation and making it worse.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: William Tell Date: Mar 13, 2011 9:47pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 8.9 Earthquake & 13 ft. Tsunami Honshu Japan

Don't take it so hard--seriously; it's just arcane ivory tower stuff at one level.

This analogy might help you understand MY frustration (and make clear to you, I think, that YOU should be able to easily dismiss me by adhering to your fundamental propositions)...again this is about me.

Imagine I am CLIFF. Now, imagine I have caught a big fish, and I tell you about it. You reply: "I don't see how it can be that big". Imagine I explain to you how I've measured it, but you tell me you don't believe in "that" system (metric? whatever) of measurement. I become frustrated trying to explain it because it's not a belief system; it's a way of knowing. Period.

We just can't talk about it; you think it's something I know it is not. You know something else, some other measuring system, and tell me "that's what you're using, CLIFF!" and I keep saying "no, it's not!"

That is really as simple as it gets; that's all we keep doing. In the end, you believe I am confused about which system I am using, and I don't believe that; my system is not about faith, even in statements other scientists make, etc. It's about a way of knowing, but only about simple materialist issues--you can claim the important ground; all of it. You get all the big issues in this world, and can run with it--I get stuck with trivia.

Really.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: SpacedAgain Date: Mar 14, 2011 2:34am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 8.9 Earthquake & 13 ft. Tsunami Honshu Japan

Early Christians and Muslims don't believe that Jesus was crucified.

I agree though that atheism is unscientific (lack of proof isn't proof) and science is a belief system, "consensus reality." That's the thrust of the modern philosophy even before post-modernism, and social science of science took it further.

It's fairly clear in signposts like "all that's solid melts into the air," modern painting of rocks floating away from the mooring of ground, Wittgenstein getting stuck on his ladder, and yes even psychedelics (they fueled interest in traditional knowledge).

Someone may say they believe in "mother nature" but where does it end? The matrix?

Some folks trust to reason
Others trust to might
I don't trust to nothing
But I know it come out right

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: NoiseCollector Date: Mar 13, 2011 9:31pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 8.9 Earthquake & 13 ft. Tsunami Honshu Japan

I wrote a song about you two and made a video.

http://www.archive.org/details/CharlieGibsonVsMelSheen_11376

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: vapors Date: Mar 12, 2011 4:39pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 8.9 Earthquake & 13 ft. Tsunami Honshu Japan

Sorry to butt in.
My assessment is that Rob is no spinner.
On the other hand, you did once mention some affiliation with them.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Mar 12, 2011 4:50pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 8.9 Earthquake & 13 ft. Tsunami Honshu Japan

v, mind like a trap! Indeed, Yes. Briefly. Thankfully.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: vapors Date: Mar 12, 2011 6:35pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 8.9 Earthquake & 13 ft. Tsunami Honshu Japan

Thankfully brief?
Your discussion here puts me in a certain mood, but not one I feel much like expounding upon in a public Grateful Dead forum, although your persistent proposed premise that one is taking a leap of faith, regardless, does not set well with me. Faith and belief systems are integral to many peoples lives and outlooks - I can only hope that yours are based upon some solid life experiences of your own. Probably my most fundamental spiritual experiences (ie: that I actively participate in) revolve around music – and as stated elsewhere in a post this evening, the music sounds much better when dancing!

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Mar 12, 2011 9:39pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 8.9 Earthquake & 13 ft. Tsunami Honshu Japan

The Spinners in '88/'89 were tending to a view of Garcia as a new Christian prophet. Once that became clear I was running out the door. When I saw the type of gender roles enforced it just made me run faster. So, thankfully brief.

I don't quite understand your post v, and I don't want to guesstimate. I am interested in what you have to say.

This post was modified by micah6vs8 on 2011-03-13 05:39:32

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: vapors Date: Mar 13, 2011 7:46am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: 8.9 Earthquake & 13 ft. Tsunami Honshu Japan

While there is much we could discuss here, I do not feel so inclined at present and apologize again for jumping in. Thanks for sharing your experience though – I had been wondering about that.

Where I place myself today with regard to matters spiritual is the result of a long, varied and sometimes colorful exploration of what it means to be an individual on this earth, and what responsibilities that may require of us. I wish to be an instrument of peace, as so beautifully stated in the prayer of St. Francis. But experience has provoked in me a sense of skepticism about faith in anything other than my own abilities and desires to do right, even as these frequently evade me.

I believe that I grasp what both you and Rob put forth, and have to say that I am more cynical now than ever before regarding religion and faith. I wish to let this go now, and pick this song as a sign off. Peace
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UtgXus3eiII&;feature=related

This post was modified by vapors on 2011-03-13 14:46:45